(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.08.23 2015가단114422

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.08.23 2015가단114422

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 16, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract on the goodwill, role, etc. of the franchise business area (hereinafter “instant goodwill”). Of the terms and conditions of the instant goodwill agreement, Article 4 of the terms and conditions of the instant goodwill agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract on the franchise business area operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant goodwill”). Article 4 of the terms and conditions of the instant goodwill agreement is “20% of the Seoul company, A (Defendant) 40%, and B (Plaintiff) 40% of the profits,” and Article 5 [Terms and Conditions of the instant agreement and the period] clause 1 of the instant agreement is “the amount, under the terms and conditions of the instant agreement, paid KRW 70,000 to the head office and not returned.”

B. On April 24, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 70,000 to the Defendant the instant goodwill price.

C. The Plaintiff received KRW 70,000,000 from the Defendant on July 31, 2013, KRW 5 million on August 6, 2013, KRW 5 million on August 8, 2013, KRW 500,000 on August 8, 2013, and KRW 70,000 on August 23, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff determined the transfer price of the instant goodwill as KRW 140 million and delegated the disposition to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that even though the Defendant transferred the instant goodwill to Nonparty B, it returned KRW 70 million to the Plaintiff, even though it transferred the instant goodwill to Nonparty B.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff delegated the right to dispose of the instant goodwill to the Defendant by fixing the transfer amount of KRW 140,000 to KRW 140,000,000,000, the Plaintiff’s assertion based on the premise that the Plaintiff delegated the right to transfer the instant goodwill to the Defendant by designating the transfer amount of KRW 140,000,000,000,000 to the Defendant is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원통영지원 2016.12.15 2015가단25791

-대전지방법원 2015.10.15 2015가단204257

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.30 2014가단1797

-대구지방법원 2017.03.29 2016나308973

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2021.01.15 2019가단224282